Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Steven Grudman
dblp:311/2923
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
0009-0002-2504-9575ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Computational geometry · 100% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bioinformatics and computational biology
structural bioinformatics |
1.2 | 2 | 2023 | Optimal selection of suitable templates in protein interface prediction · Bioinform. 2023 INTERCAAT: identifying interface residues between macromolecules · Bioinform. 2022 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › molecular evolution
protein evolution |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Optimal selection of suitable templates in protein interface prediction · Bioinform. 2023 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein-protein interaction prediction
protein interface prediction |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Optimal selection of suitable templates in protein interface prediction · Bioinform. 2023 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein sequence analysis
residue conservation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Optimal selection of suitable templates in protein interface prediction · Bioinform. 2023 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein-protein interaction prediction
interface residue prediction |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | INTERCAAT: identifying interface residues between macromolecules · Bioinform. 2022 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › structural bioinformatics › macromolecular structure analysis
macromolecular interface analysis |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | INTERCAAT: identifying interface residues between macromolecules · Bioinform. 2022 |
Computational geometry
voronoi diagram |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | INTERCAAT: identifying interface residues between macromolecules · Bioinform. 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
voronoi tessellation · 1.1van der waals radii · 1.1mutual information · 0.7molecular docking · 0.7hierarchical clustering · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Optimal selection of suitable templates in protein interface predictionabstractMOTIVATION: Molecular-level classification of protein-protein interfaces can greatly assist in functional characterization and rational drug design. The most accurate protein interface predictions rely on finding homologous proteins with known interfaces since most interfaces are conserved within the same protein family. The accuracy of these template-based prediction approaches depends on the correct choice of suitable templates. Choosing the right templates in the immunoglobulin superfamily (IgSF) is challenging because its members share low sequence identity and display a wide range of alternative binding sites despite structural homology. RESULTS: We present a new approach to predict protein interfaces. First, template-specific, informative evolutionary profiles are established using a mutual information-based approach. Next, based on the similarity of residue level conservation scores derived from the evolutionary profiles, a query protein is hierarchically clustered with all available template proteins in its superfamily with known interface definitions. Once clustered, a subset of the most closely related templates is selected, and an interface prediction is made. These initial interface predictions are subsequently refined by extensive docking. This method was benchmarked on 51 IgSF proteins and can predict nontrivial interfaces of IgSF proteins with an average and median F-score of 0.64 and 0.78, respectively. We also provide a way to assess the confidence of the results. The average and median F-scores increase to 0.8 and 0.81, respectively, if 27% of low confidence cases and 17% of medium confidence cases are removed. Lastly, we provide residue level interface predictions, protein complexes, and confidence measurements for singletons in the IgSF. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code is freely available at: https://gitlab.com/fiserlab.org/interdct_with_refinement. Steven Grudman, J. Eduardo Fajardo, András Fiser |
Bioinform. | 1 |
| 2022 | INTERCAAT: identifying interface residues between macromoleculesabstractSUMMARY: The Interface Contact definition with Adaptable Atom Types (INTERCAAT) was developed to determine the atomic interactions between molecules that form a known three dimensional structure. First, INTERCAAT creates a Voronoi tessellation where each atom acts as a seed. Interactions are defined by atoms that share a hyperplane and whose distance is less than the sum of each atoms' Van der Waals radii plus the diameter of a solvent molecule. Interacting atoms are then classified and interactions are filtered based on compatibility. INTERCAAT implements an adaptive atom classification method; therefore, it can explore interfaces between a variety macromolecules. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code is freely available at: https://gitlab.com/fiserlab.org/intercaat. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. Steven Grudman, J. Eduardo Fajardo, András Fiser |
Bioinform. | 1 |